Behaviorism. It is a theory based on that behavior is acquired through conditioning. Some behaviors, such as acting, thinking, and feeling, can be scientifically observed and measured. Language, as a behavior, is a set of habits acquired by operant conditioning and reinforcement.
Binarism. A principle of analysis requiring that a linguistic system, as a phonological, case, or semantic system, be represented as a set of binary oppositions.
Constituent. A word, phrase, or clause forming a part of a larger construction. A linguistic element considered as part of a construction.
Dialect. A regional variety of language distinguished by features of vocabulary, grammar, and pronunciation from other regional varieties and constituting together with them a single language.
Endocentric. Having the same grammatical function as one of its immediate constituents that does not modify the other immediate constituent
Empirism. The view that experience, especially of the senses, is the only source of knowledge, and that knowledge cannot extend beyong experience.
Exocentric. When a phrase or construction does not follow the grammatical behavior of either constituent.
Hypostasis. Is a relationship between a name and a known quantity, as a cultural personification of an entity or quality.
Lexicon. The vocabulary of a particular language, field, social class, person, etc.
Mentalism. The doctrine that objects of knowledge has no existence except in the mind of the perceiver.
Syncategorematic. Not capable of being used as a term by itself.
The study of language within the context of
anthropology and the inevitable overlap between the studies of language and
culture has been long recognized by the fathers of the discipline of
anthropology, which has been known as Ethnolinguistics. Sir Edward Taylor,
Marett, and Malinowski works began with the conviction that language and
culture need an integral study, particularly in case of the simple societies of
the world.
Anthropological linguist refer to a four field study of human beings
that contains the fallowing fields: Physical Anthropology, Archeology, Socio
Cultural Anthropology and Linguistic Anthropology.
First
fieldworks were done in linguistically oriented case studies and on the
investigation of single languages concerning their association to culture or
cultural modes of thought.
There are
different approaches within anthropological linguistics, Malinowski’s
investigation of planting activities that combine language with physical
activities led him to conclude that language is one of the main cultural forces
– an adjunct of physical activities and by this an equivalent of gestures and
movement. Malinowski furthermore concluded that:
-Verbal
acts are part of human behavior
-Language
is an autonomous cultural aspect with unique, unreplaceable function
-A
single language is determined by its users’ needs and interests
-Language
is part of planned behavior
However, the single most outstanding
contribution to the study of linguistic anthropology came from Franz Boas
during the first quarter of the 20th century. Boas, Sapir,
Bloomfield and many others continued their interest in the study of language as
an anthropological exercise with the rejection of mentalism and reinforcing the
descriptive method.
In
1911 Franz Boas published his Handbook of American Indian Language. Part 1, and
set a direction for American linguistics. In this book Boas demonstrates the
relationship between linguistics and anthropology. He discussed this in terms
of two interrelated issues. One is the practical need for an anthropologist to
learn the language of the indigenous people where (s) he intends to work, because there are topics like
poetry, prayers, oratory and personal and local names, which could be most
effectively approaches through learning the local language. The second one is
more theoretical, as there are a whole lot of ‘unconscious phenomena’ – such as
the classification of ideas and expressed by same or related terms, metaphors
and their uses etc.— which can only be best understood by learning the
indigenous language.
Boas empirically looked for the cultural
root. The abstract linguistic theorizing, for him and others descriptivist, was
a means to an end of practical description of particular language, rather than
thinking of individual languages as sources of data for the construction of a
general theory of language.
Boas aptly remarked, “Whatever our
literary and artistic or our philosophical and religious grasp of human ways,
the scientific understanding of man will in all likelihood grow from our
understanding of language…”
Sapir and Whorf and the emergence of
cognitive anthropology during the middle of 20th century, connecting
language with cultural analysis, consolidated into new areas of ethnolinguistics.
Studies of the native perception of color, diseases, kinship etc. opened up a
new dimension to understanding of culture with the help of language.
Edward Sapir ranged widely
through and around his subject, finding out its relations with literature,
music, anthropology, and psychology, thus the influence of language on every
department of human life. His Selected Writings in Mandelbaum’ Language,
Culture and Personality shows the width of his scholarship. Descriptivism in
general had a shortcoming in that one of its key principles was that a general
theory of human language was unimportant and hence, less emphasis on
theorization and more on the analytic practice.
Between the main Sapir’s contributions
are: Classification of Native American languages, Linguistic theory,
Anthropological thought and Breadth of languages studied.ACTIVITY
In this Blog, we will talk about certain topics that are related to Linguistics. We will also add some activities and researches that will help to understand these topics better.
